continuum-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Emmanuel Venisse <emman...@venisse.net>
Subject Re: build scheduling issues
Date Wed, 08 Nov 2006 12:46:14 GMT
Yes

Jesse McConnell a écrit :
> we should add a page that analyzes each schedule for cycles...that
> would be a cool little feature
> 
> On 11/8/06, Emmanuel Venisse <emmanuel@venisse.net> wrote:
>> Yes, we need a global ordering, so projects will be build 
>> independently of groups, because in some
>> case a cycle can be created between groups (not necessary between 
>> projects).
>>
>> In case a cycle is detected between projects, continuum can't find the 
>> build order. In this case, I
>> think we need to sort a little project so will reduce build errors. So 
>> if we have a cycle, we can
>> sort projects in a group and build them. In most of case (maven 
>> projects), we don't have a cycle in
>> a group.
>>
>> Emmanuel
>>
>> Brett Porter a écrit :
>> > I think you want global ordering. Grouping should just be a
>> > display/management technique, not anything that changes how projects 
>> are
>> > handled.
>> >
>> > However, this needs to be reviewed as a whole (which I think 
>> Emmanuel is
>> > doing), such that builds can be triggered when their dependencies 
>> change
>> > which will help with the ordering as it won't be dependant on them all
>> > being triggered at the same time?
>> >
>> > - Brett
>> >
>> > On 08/11/2006, at 9:51 AM, Jesse McConnell wrote:
>> >
>> >> I was reading through the DefaultContinuum.buildProjects( Schedule id
>> >> ) method and after discussing some things with Emmanuel...I think we
>> >> have a problem here.  When I went through and refactored things to
>> >> support a more Project Group centric setup with continuum I changed
>> >> this method a bit.
>> >>
>> >> Originally, this method would gather up all projects that would be
>> >> triggered by that schedule, run them all through the project sorter
>> >> and then build each in sequence.
>> >>
>> >> When I added the project groups to this mix, I changed things to be on
>> >> a project group basis, so that on a project group by project group
>> >> basis it would order the projects and build them.  At the time I
>> >> thought this was the way to go...but maybe not.
>> >>
>> >> 17:14 <evenisse> we need to take all projects from all groups, sort

>> them
>> >> 17:15 <evenisse> if we don't have a cycle, it's ok and we build all
>> >> 17:15 <evenisse> if it isn't ok, we sort project by group
>> >>
>> >> For example, if we loaded up a Plexus group and a Maven group...the
>> >> way it currently is (with my change) it would process all triggered
>> >> builds within one group and then process all triggered builds in the
>> >> other group.   This would not take into account potential dependencies
>> >> between the two.
>> >>
>> >> Does anyone have any thoughts on this?  I am inclined to fix it up so
>> >> its like it used to be where all projects across all project groups
>> >> are thrown into the graph....I keep feeling like I am missing
>> >> something wrong with this, but I can't pin it down.
>> >>
>> >> One thing that perhaps Emmanuel could explain a bit more is the third
>> >> comment there.  In our conversation on this he said that he thinks
>> >> that the cycles are cropping up all the time, and if thats the case
>> >> then we are building a lot of unordered builds which would account for
>> >> some of the strange reports we have been getting.  Are you saying that
>> >> if we detect the cycle we default back to the way I am doing it now?
>> >> order within the groups...
>> >>
>> >> jesse
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --jesse mcconnell
>> >> jesse.mcconnell@gmail.com
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
> 
> 


Mime
View raw message